Model Comparison

Phi 4 vs Qwen2.5-Coder 7B Instruct

Phi 4 shows notably better performance in the majority of benchmarks.

Want to compare interactively?Try the playground

Performance Benchmarks

Comparative analysis across standard metrics

4 benchmarks

Phi 4 outperforms in 3 benchmarks (MATH, MMLU, MMLU-Pro), while Qwen2.5-Coder 7B Instruct is better at 1 benchmark (HumanEval).

Phi 4 shows notably better performance in the majority of benchmarks.

Wed May 13 2026 • llm-stats.com

Arena Performance

Human preference votes

Model Size

Parameter count comparison

7.7B diff

Phi 4 has 7.7B more parameters than Qwen2.5-Coder 7B Instruct, making it 110.0% larger.

Phi 4

14.7Bparameters

Qwen2.5-Coder 7B Instruct

7.0Bparameters

14.7B

Phi 4

7.0B

Qwen2.5-Coder 7B Instruct

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

Only Phi 4 specifies input context (16,000 tokens). Only Phi 4 specifies output context (16,000 tokens).

Phi 4

Input16,000 tokens

Output16,000 tokens

Qwen2.5-Coder 7B Instruct

Input- tokens

Output- tokens

Wed May 13 2026 • llm-stats.com

License

Usage and distribution terms

Phi 4 is licensed under MIT, while Qwen2.5-Coder 7B Instruct uses Apache 2.0.

License differences may affect how you can use these models in commercial or open-source projects.

Phi 4

MIT

Open weights

Qwen2.5-Coder 7B Instruct

Apache 2.0

Open weights

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Phi 4 was released on 2024-12-12, while Qwen2.5-Coder 7B Instruct was released on 2024-09-19.

Phi 4 is 3 months newer than Qwen2.5-Coder 7B Instruct.

Phi 4

Dec 12, 2024

1.4 years ago

2mo newer

Qwen2.5-Coder 7B Instruct

Sep 19, 2024

1.6 years ago

Knowledge Cutoff

When training data ends

Phi 4 has a documented knowledge cutoff of 2024-06-01, while Qwen2.5-Coder 7B Instruct's cutoff date is not specified.

We can confirm Phi 4's training data extends to 2024-06-01, but cannot make a direct comparison without Qwen2.5-Coder 7B Instruct's cutoff date.

Phi 4

Jun 2024

Qwen2.5-Coder 7B Instruct

—

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue discussion→

Key Takeaways

Phi 4

View details

Microsoft

Larger context window (16,000 tokens)

Higher MATH score (80.4% vs 46.6%)

Higher MMLU score (84.8% vs 67.6%)

Higher MMLU-Pro score (70.4% vs 40.1%)

Qwen2.5-Coder 7B Instruct

View details

Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team

Higher HumanEval score (88.4% vs 82.6%)

Detailed Comparison

AI Model Comparison Table
Feature	Phi 4	Qwen2.5-Coder 7B Instruct

FAQ

Common questions about Phi 4 vs Qwen2.5-Coder 7B Instruct.

Which is better, Phi 4 or Qwen2.5-Coder 7B Instruct?

Phi 4 shows notably better performance in the majority of benchmarks. Phi 4 is made by Microsoft and Qwen2.5-Coder 7B Instruct is made by Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team. The best choice depends on your use case — compare their benchmark scores, pricing, and capabilities above.

How does Phi 4 compare to Qwen2.5-Coder 7B Instruct in benchmarks?

Phi 4 scores MMLU: 84.8%, HumanEval+: 82.8%, HumanEval: 82.6%, MGSM: 80.6%, MATH: 80.4%. Qwen2.5-Coder 7B Instruct scores HumanEval: 88.4%, GSM8k: 83.9%, MBPP: 83.5%, HellaSwag: 76.8%, Winogrande: 72.9%.

What are the context window sizes for Phi 4 and Qwen2.5-Coder 7B Instruct?

Phi 4 supports 16K tokens and Qwen2.5-Coder 7B Instruct supports an unknown number of tokens. A larger context window lets you process longer documents, conversations, or codebases in a single request.

What are the main differences between Phi 4 and Qwen2.5-Coder 7B Instruct?

Key differences include licensing (MIT vs Apache 2.0). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes Phi 4 and Qwen2.5-Coder 7B Instruct?

Phi 4 is developed by Microsoft and Qwen2.5-Coder 7B Instruct is developed by Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team.